|
|
|
|
|
by tom_b
2803 days ago
|
|
The education model (immersive, time-intensive, mastery learning) Lambda School has in place seems like a very sweet spot between bootcamps and traditional university CS programs. But some of that success has to be attributed to riding a boom wave of demand for software engineers. I'm a mid-career software engineer and have seen at least two "bust" cycles where experienced, well-credentialed, and just smart engineers went 12+ months between jobs. The effects of that have been reflected in undergraduate CS enrollments - we see big dips in the mid 90s and prior to 2006 (where a huge push up in enrollments begins again - https://cra.org/data/generation-cs/phenomenal-growth-cs-majo...). How well positioned the Lambda School revenue model to handle a 50% drop in demand and significant drop in starting salaries? I am a big believer in the trade school process for software engineers, but I also think that the long term view for programmer careers is one that includes greatly reduced salaries in the average case and one reason I feel that way is that a learner can be productive in the workforce with a shorter-term and less specialized educational background. |
|
From a selfish perspective, I would love for a recession to happen today. When recessions happen money is tight and people go back to school who otherwise would have been employed.
Of course, we are exposed to risk at the market level; if we stop hiring software engineers as a society Lambda School is in trouble, so we’re betting on that not happening.
That said, the purpose of Lambda School is to take people to the highest point of economic potential as quickly as is possible, not just to be a tech trade school. It’s crazy that there’s no institution in the US that’s great at optimizing human capital other than four years of school and hundreds of thousands of dollars at a university. So soon we’ll be training for other verticals as well that aren’t just tech.